Point is, why can't there be an alternative to marriage? Marriage has been defined as a union between a man and a woman, so is it really that important that two guys can get married? Is it really oppressive of us to say marriage is for a guy and girl, but you can still do whatever you want. Live together, manage money together, have a lifelong relationship...

Point is, why can't there be an alternative to marriage? Marriage has been defined as a union between a man and a woman, so is it really that important that two guys can get married? Is it really oppressive of us to say marriage is for a guy and girl, but you can still do whatever you want. Live together, manage money together, have a lifelong relationship...

There are certain rights that come with being married that aren't available otherwise.

Posted by MikeT23 on 7/15/2013 3:21:00 PM (view original):I prefer inaction over pointless action. Seems like a sound way to live.

Scurrying about and doing nothing is pointless.

If you guys are so afraid of gays and lesbians maybe you should move to the bible belt, or better yet to Saudi Arabia whose ultimately forward thinking government put to death people who dare to be gay.

Well, if you actually read the thread before responding you'd know that I don't care either way about SSM. Just a few pages ago I said "Let them get married and have all the problems that come with it."

I'm just shitting all over the reasons BL has given to allow it. Because they're stupid.

300 pages is just too much. The only way I am looking through an entire 300 page thread is if it is all pics of TnA in the pit. :)

Point is, why can't there be an alternative to marriage? Marriage has been defined as a union between a man and a woman, so is it really that important that two guys can get married? Is it really oppressive of us to say marriage is for a guy and girl, but you can still do whatever you want. Live together, manage money together, have a lifelong relationship...

Definitions do change when it makes sense to change them. IMHO it is oppressive to keep people from having the advantages of marriage just because they prefer their own sex. Like MikeT says let em have it, then they can have those problems too. Im impressed that MikeT feels that way.

Posted by tecwrg on 7/15/2013 3:32:00 PM (view original):No. You just prefer to dictate social policy.

He is not doing anything different then you Tec, in that he is giving his opinion on the matter. A more highly evolved opinion no doubt, but still just his opinion. You and MikeT and you other troglodytes should just jump into your time machines and blast back to your fav decade the 50s and just stay there. Either that or move to Saudi Arabia and be with your own kind.

Posted by MikeT23 on 7/15/2013 3:21:00 PM (view original):I prefer inaction over pointless action. Seems like a sound way to live.

Scurrying about and doing nothing is pointless.

If you guys are so afraid of gays and lesbians maybe you should move to the bible belt, or better yet to Saudi Arabia whose ultimately forward thinking government put to death people who dare to be gay.

Well, if you actually read the thread before responding you'd know that I don't care either way about SSM. Just a few pages ago I said "Let them get married and have all the problems that come with it."

I'm just shitting all over the reasons BL has given to allow it. Because they're stupid.

300 pages is just too much. The only way I am looking through an entire 300 page thread is if it is all pics of TnA in the pit. :)

Just saying, as usual, your limited knowledge of what's going on is showing. Maybe STFU if you don't know the score.

Interesting, all but 2 of the 10 either fully allow it, or a significant portion of their population can have SSM if they choose. I fully expect most anti-SSMers to call BS on this, but I am satisfied with the result.

You worked backward until you found what you wanted to find, but yet you have NOT established a correlation. Any number of factors can and do go into the "happiness" of a country; you're just trying to take one item that fits your argument and claim the "happiness" has been influenced by it when nothing suggests that to be the case.

I would suggest those countries you mention would be the "happiest" REGARDLESS of where they stood on the issue of SSM.

The positive effect is that freedom is gained by an oppressed populace...

There are plenty of "freedoms" that don't exist because it is better for society that way. In fact, I think Americans have too many "freedoms" in general and could stand to lose a few (but that's another argument).

If you guys are so afraid of gays and lesbians maybe you should move to the bible belt, or better yet to Saudi Arabia whose ultimately forward thinking government put to death people who dare to be gay.

So if you're in Saudi Arabia, don't choose to be gay while there. If you choose to be gay, leave first. Problem solved.

You and MikeT and you other troglodytes should just jump into your time machines and blast back to your fav decade the 50s and just stay there. Either that or move to Saudi Arabia and be with your own kind.

See, greeny, I had respect for you because you hadn't been throwing around pointless insults like so many others, but you just went and ruined it. There is no need to attack someone else just because their opinion differs from your own. I thought you got that, and now I'm disappointed to see that it appears you didn't.